If you're a new student to design or maybe you want to refresh your skills, this book features a series of pedagogical games that architects can play as a means to design. Thanks to publisher Routledge and Joseph Choma, Archinect is giving away five copies of the book to our readers!

Photo courtesy of Joseph Choma.

Photo courtesy of Joseph Choma.

Written in straightforward text and featuring explanatory diagrams, the book's learning objectives include: computational thinking and making; introduction to design as an iterative, reflective, and rigorous process; ideas of continuity and discontinuity; and understanding the bias and constraints of analog and digital tooling. It also includes compelling examples of student work to elaborate on each exercise, and 18 informative case studies from Europe, the U.S., Mexico, and Asia.

Archinect recently got in touch with Joseph Choma, who shared more details behind his latest title below:

Photo courtesy of Joseph Choma.

ARCHINECT: Similar to your 2015 book “MORPHING”, “Études for Architects” understands itself as a pedagogical guide to spatial design; a playful tool for teachers and students. How has this latest publication evolved with the feedback you received since MORPHING?

JOSEPH CHOMA: Although the two books share some similar motivations, I think they serve very different purposes. MORPHING was a documentation of my design research into a specific type of mathematics. As a result, its primary communicative mechanism was drawings and equations. Études for Architects introduces design foundations through computational thinking. The book argues that computation is not limited to the instrumentation of a computer, but is a rule-based methodology, where constraints and parameters yield opportunities.

When flipping through MORPHING, there is a relentless systematic nature to the book. Executing design research with intense discipline, rigor and craft is not easy. Similarly, within music, études are short but very challenging compositions. However, after they have been mastered, a new range of skills can be applied to numerous compositions. Hence, the title of my new book, Études for Architects.

Executing design research with intense discipline, rigor and craft is not easy. Similarly, within music, études are short but very challenging compositions. However, after they have been mastered, a new range of skills can be applied to numerous compositions.

The role of precedents is also important in both books. I think architecture is an intellectual discourse that builds on itself. Within MORPHING, mathematics was used to analyze and recreate existing buildings. Then, the process continued to reveal a series of design variations beyond the initial building. This is pedagogically very important! Precedent studies have become a tradition in architectural education; however, analytical studies rarely translate directly into useful generative devices.

Within Études for Architects, I strive to teach readers to 'see' — beyond that which is literally there. Therefore, many of the exercises stay open to a variety of perceptual interpretations. In this book, seemingly abstract explorations are grounded with contemporary buildings. Readers not only understand how to explore different design operations, but begin to understand why they are exploring them and how they can be applied in professional practice.

Photo courtesy of Joseph Choma.

ARCHINECT: A recurring theme in your books is understanding the bias and constraints of digital tools. Based on your experience as an educator, what do you see as the greatest threat to creativity in the current and next generation of designers?

JC: I think creativity is a form of rigorous play. If we are not actively engaging and reflecting, we are not designing. There is nothing worse than seeing a student sitting at their desk and doing what appears to be nothing. You do not need a brilliant idea to start a design process. Instead of just 'thinking', students may be better off 'thinking-with' something. This could be as simple as folding paper. After making, what do you see? Through the exploratory process, you can identify criteria to evaluate the design. Eventually, an idea or concept may emerge and further drive the process. Ideas can come at anytime.

That said, every tool or medium has constraints and bias. Depending on which tool is used may influence the direction of the project. For example, folding paper will yield a different set of options than building a model with dowels or using a specific software. All are potentially valuable. It's important for students to understand how to move back and forth between different media.

I think creativity is a form of rigorous play. If we are not actively engaging and reflecting, we are not designing.

Tools can just be tools or they can be 'instruments-to-think-with'. In my opinion, they should be used to generate ideas, not just record preconceived designs. Additionally, we may have a preconceived notion of how a specific tool should be used. We should try our best to free ourselves from fixed mindsets. Even though a specific tool may be made to do a specific task, that does not mean it cannot be used in other ways.

Lastly, as digital tools get more complex and hierarchical, it is imperative to remember, nothing is ever fully optimized. Optimization can only occur within a very strict framework, but if that framework changes, the model of how that design is evaluated changes. We should always challenge the lens with which we are working within.

Want a chance to win a copy of “Études for Architects”? Fill out this survey by the deadline on Monday, August 27, end of day. Five paperback copies of the book are available to win. Winners will be announced in the comment section below. This giveaway is open to U.S.-based entrants only. Good luck!